Commentary on Judgment No. 16352 of 2024: Balancing Judgment Among Circumstances in Continuing Crimes

The recent ruling No. 16352 of February 29, 2024, has sparked heated debate among criminal law experts, as it addresses a crucial issue: the balancing judgment among circumstances in continuing crimes. In this article, we will analyze the main aspects of this ruling and its impact on Italian jurisprudence.

The Balancing Judgment Among Circumstances

The Court, in its decision, clarified that the balancing judgment among circumstances must be carried out exclusively with reference to the circumstances of the most serious crime. This means that the circumstances of "satellite" crimes should only be considered to determine the increase in penalty pursuant to Article 81, paragraph two, of the Penal Code.

  • The circumstances must relate to the most serious crime.
  • The circumstances of satellite crimes are relevant only for the increase in penalty.
  • The balancing must respect the principles of "favor rei" and legality.

It is important to emphasize that if the balancing of opposing circumstances related to a satellite crime affects the type of penalty applicable, this aspect must be taken into account. This principle aligns with the protection of the rights of the accused, as established by the Constitution and European regulations.

Balancing judgment among circumstances - Applicability only to circumstances concerning the most serious crime - Existence - Exceptions - Reasons - Specific case. In the case of continuing crime, the balancing judgment among circumstances must be carried out exclusively with regard to those related to the most serious crime, considering those pertaining to "satellite" crimes solely for the purpose of determining the increase in penalty pursuant to Article 81, paragraph two, of the Penal Code, unless the balancing judgment among opposing circumstances related to a satellite crime impacts the type of penalty applicable, in compliance with the principles of "favor rei" and legality. (Specific case in which the Court annulled with referral the challenged decision limited to the omitted balancing of circumstances related to the satellite crime of Article 612 of the Penal Code, noting that the outcome of the balancing judgment depended on the possible application of an increase for continuation, either of the monetary penalty or of the custodial penalty, respectively provided for simple threat and aggravated threat in the first and second paragraphs of the incriminating norm in question).

Practical Implications of the Ruling

This ruling has significant practical implications for judges and criminal defense attorneys. The annulment with referral of the challenged decision, due to the omitted balancing of circumstances related to the satellite crime, highlights the need for a thorough analysis of the circumstances at issue. This implies that, during the judgment phase, each crime must be assessed carefully, considering not only the severity of the main crime but also how the circumstances of satellite crimes may influence the final penalty.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 16352 of 2024 represents an important step in the evolution of jurisprudence regarding continuing crimes. The clarity provided by the Court on the balancing judgment among circumstances offers a more defined regulatory framework, which may influence future decisions in the criminal field. It is essential that lawyers and judges adapt to these indications to ensure fair justice that respects the rights of all individuals involved.

Bianucci Law Firm